We have now exceeded 400 supporters. This is great. The next milestone is 500 supporters. Once the petition reaches 500 supporters it will show up in more recommender lists. This will be even more true when it reaches 1000 supporters. For the time being however, the petition is still at the stage where it needs sharing and promotions in order to gain momentum, and it will likely need to reach at least a thousand supporters to gain any kind of media attention.

Sharing exposes the petition to a much wider group of people. People are also more likely to respond if you message them directly, but broadcasting can help also. Promotions increase view count which is directly correlated with increased supporters, and is highly effective.

In my efforts to promote this petition myself I have come across some common counter arguments to the idea. I would like to take a minute to go through each of these arguments one at a time and explain why I believe they are erroneous:

1. "We don't want to start World War 3". This argument only really makes sense if you are unaware of the huge amount of Western arms and equipment already being transported into Ukraine via Poland, including armoured vehicles and tanks. Clearly New Zealand supplying a few armoured vehicles is not an escalation as this is just more of what many other countries are already doing.
2. "I don't want New Zealand to get involved". New Zealand already is involved. We are already supplying humanitarian aid and contributing to a fund that is purchasing lethal aid.
3. "I don't support lethal aid to Ukraine". I that case you are in the minority. A recent Newshub opinion poll revealed that 67 percent of respondents supported lethal aid. In this case this is entirely appropriate given that this lethal aid is going towards pushing out an army that is committing war crimes on Ukrainian soil. And in any case, we are already funding lethal aid so this debate is over.
4. "New Zealand is a long way from Ukraine so why should I care?" You should care for several reasons. The most obvious being the vast levels of human suffering being visited on millions of Ukrainians. You should also care because this is a direct attack on the international rules based order. And you should care because the conflict has the potential to create a food crisis as well as an energy crisis.
5. "New Zealand's NZLAVs are 'junk' so we shouldn't give them to Ukraine". The NZLAVs the NZ army uses were not made in New Zealand. They were made in Canada by General Dynamics Land Systems. The vehicle is used in large numbers by the Canadian military and has seen extensive combat usage in Afghanistan.
6. "The logistics of getting armoured vehicles to Ukraine from New Zealand are too hard because New Zealand is a long way from Ukraine". Australia is also a long way from Ukraine but that hasn't stopped them from transporting 20 armoured vehicles and 6 155 mm artillery guns to Ukraine. In addition New Zealand possesses 5 C130H Hercules aircraft that are designed for exactly this purpose and are capable of transporting an NZLAV. We have also done this type of operation before when we deployed NZLAVs to Afghanistan. One of the reasons for having these vehicles is that you can transport them by airlift to anywhere in the world where they are needed.
7. "Ukraine can only operate Soviet era equipment, so our equipment is no good to them". The UK is sending 120 armoured vehicles, Germany is sending older APCs and anti aircraft tanks. Canada is sending 8 armoured vehicles. The US is sending 200 M113 APCs. What all of this equipment has in common is that none of it is Soviet style equipment. The reality is that Ukraine is in a transitional phase where is it using both Soviet and NATO style equipment.
8. "Ukraine hasn't asked for our NZLAVs". Actually they have. If you watch the linked video below from President Zelensky you will notice that he specifically asks for Infantry Fighting Vehicles. He also makes no mention of them needing to be Soviet vehicles. The NZLAV is an IFV.
9. "If the NZLAVs are no use to us then why would they be useful to Ukraine?". Because we have more of them than we need and we are not fighting a war.
10. "We should send our Javelins instead of Armoured Vehicles". We should send both.
11. "The USA can do everything so why should we bother?". A variant of this is, "Australia can do everything so why should we bother?". Why should the USA do everything? The USA isn't in Europe. Also many of the European members of the NATO alliance have been spending less than the required 2 percent of GDP for a long time. Germany has publicly acknowledged recently that is has been under spending on defence. The situation is finally being rectified, but the lesson has been a long time coming. Also how can New Zealand expect other countries to come to our rescue in the event of an attack on us if we don't pull our weight when others require assistance?
12. "New Zealand doesn't have anything to give". We have both armoured vehicles and Javelin missile systems.
13. "New Zealand is a small country". So what? The Czech Republic is also a small country but that hasn't stopped them from sending T-72 tanks to Ukraine.
14. "The financial aid NZ has supplied already is sufficient and likely more useful that sending vehicles". The $7.5 million we have supplied to purchase weapons and ammunition through the UK is substantially less than the $20 million dollars we just made in an arms deals with Chile. So firstly this amount is not enough. Secondly, there is some benefit to supplying actual equipment over just funding. There isn't an unlimited supply of surplus military hardware sitting around all over the world and countries can't manufacture new equipment instantly. It is a fallacy to suggest that simply supplying money is completely equivalent to sending actual equipment. What Ukraine needs is actual equipment on the ground as quickly as possible.

Hopefully you found this informative and interesting.

Thanks a lot for your continued support,

Finn